NEW YORK (Reuters) -- Insurers of World Trade Center buildings destroyed in the Sept. 11 attacks won a victory when a federal judge Tuesday ruled they need not pay policy holders an extra $700 million to make a rebuilt complex better than it was.

Judge Harold Baer of the U.S. district court in Manhattan accepted the insurers' arguments the three "replacement cost" policies capped payouts at what it would cost to rebuild the site precisely as it existed prior to Sept. 11, 2001.

He rejected arguments by developer Silverstein Properties Inc. that it should recover the additional $700 million to make a rebuilt complex safe, modern and politically acceptable.

[...]

Looks like Silverstein is actually losing a lot of money, and he can't get out of the 99-year contract. He has to rebuild all the office surface destroyed + pay the 120 million/year + build the new security measures (including the anti-detonation wall around the new buildings included in the new project) with the little more of 4 billion, and he still can't find people to fill the new places, several months after opening WTC7 he still has half building available.

What a ridiculous lie of a name that is, since these attacks the only thing I have seen is USA freedoms taken away. They should rename it the "FBI/MOSSAD wiretap spy tower" or the "3,000 dead here, 3000 dead and climbing over there" tower.

I think most of SF's view is that this was a Neo-Pearl Harbor. It was allowed, not orchestrated, imo. mikhaelis ad hominem only gets you so far.

Don't try to skew the facts of what I said. I attacked the stupidity of the arguement, then proceeded my stance with the FACTS of the case. Ad hominem ("take the argument to the man" or "attack the man") strictly implies my posts were devoiof facts. Actually, my post was fact based, and yes I threw in my personal opinion of anyone choosing to blindly believe conspiracy websites.